*Editor's note: this story has been updated to correct the scheduled jury selection date.

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is moving forward with a civil lawsuit against a local demolition company that allegedly released asbestos into the air when it tore down the historic John Sunday House in Pensacola.

On July 16, 2016, Maverick Demolition of Northwest Florida, Inc., demolished a century-old brick home that once belonged to prominent local businessman John Sunday. The company also tore down an adjacent building on the same lot.

After the structures were torn down, an environmental group surveyed the two debris piles and reported that some of the scraps contained asbestos. The DEP filed a civil lawsuit in April 2017 alleging Maverick failed to inspect the building for asbestos. The department also claims Maverick mishandled the toxic materials and failed to issue the proper notifications before starting its demolition work.

The lawsuit also alleges that Maverick allowed the asbestos maintaining waste material to remain onsite for 41 days, before it was ultimately removed by the property owner.

Maverick has denied these allegations. The company also claims the property in question was exempt from the regulations asserted by the DEP.

In April 2016, the two parties discussed whether the demolition of single-family homes was subject to national emissions standards for "hazardous air," according to the DEPs filing. The DEP claims officials told McCoy that the standards don't apply to the demolition of individual single-family homes, but do apply to the demolition of multiple homes that share the same site and the same owner or operator.

McCoy's response to the court was that the conversation "related to a completely different project and property, involving a separate and distinguishable set of facts."

The trial has been scheduled for June 10, 2019, however the two parties have been ordered to seek mediation.

The DEP is asking for civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day the defendant was in violation, reimbursement of its investigative and legal costs, and any other awards the court finds appropriate.